“hey here’s news. Maybe. I can’t actually tell you. It’s just what I was told. This hasn’t been relevant to me since it once was. But here’s a blog post about it. I like cheese.”
Really weird article. A bunch of snarky comments from the author that add nothing to the conversation. “It’s been a decade since I touched an Nvidia card, so I’m just giving you the info I read in a changeling. Couldn’t tell you if it was true or not, so fuck you!”
I am also not a fan of this website, but NVIDIA proprietary drivers are notoriously bad especially with Wayland, so I was thinking that people might find it useful and upgrade their drivers.
Outside of that the toolkit’s file picker is used, as the system doesn’t seem to provide one (via the portal), so the only reasonable fallback is to show the file picker that you know is there, which is the one of the application’s toolkit.
Use PS1=“▌t▐nw→” to display your local time each time you press enter. And make aliases of lengthy commands such as alias internettest=“curl -s https://raw.githubusercontent.com/sivel/speedtest-cli/master/speedtest.py | python -” (You need to install python to run this.)
It won’t matter that much UNLESS a specific setting you might want is disabled such as virtualization.
Consider checking now if virtualization is enabled or disabled. If your BIOS settings are fairly permissive it isn’t that big of a deal. But if they are restrictive it can make it a pain in the ass to work around.
Source code is available at GitHub but it require you to have your phone by yourside e.g. connected via usb or in the same network so you can connect via IP
Because the list is “certified” not “works with” - essentially, the “certified” list is for hardware that not only works, but that Canonical will guarantee works and will make software changes to fix if it breaks
Sure, but why aren’t those vendors certified? Is it a lack of action on the vendor’s part? Is it a monetary problem where Canonical is demanding too much money and thus gatekeeping smaller vendors with smaller pockets from being certified? what is it?
I suspect most vendors just dgaf about being linux certified. They just build their hardware to work with Windows since that is what most people will use. If the hardware happens to work with Linux too, great. But it’s much more important to make sure it works with a system that over 90% of your users use.
If you build laptops that you deliver with a Linux system on it, then yes, you will make sure it is Linux certified and it works properly.
It’s not difficult to imagine that for most laptops that are made, Linux wasn’t even considered for a second.
If it’s not an issue, it’s not an issue. If you need to change the settings at some point, you could look up if there is a way to reset the password. Or sometimes there are tools that let you change the EEPROM settings from linux, without needing to open the BIOS. Depends on the hardware.
Most prompt customizers have an option for showing how long last command ran and whether it succeeded/failed or simply prompt timestamp, it's often default. I use Tide, there's also Starship and a number of others. You can also roll your own ofcourse.
You can use Fuse to encrypt files on the fly using a wide assortment of schemas. The trick is to make it available at the right time to all the desktop apps (as the environment is starting up).
All of this is available already, for example I’m encrypting the files I sync to Dropbox and I mount the decrypted version to a dir on my desktop on startup. It’s not the entire home dir but you get the idea. It’s just gonna need some polish to become really smooth and user friendly.
Im most interested in encrypted homedirs for servers. Since all my collegues are to lazy to use encrypted ssh keys, i hoped that systemd-homed makes it possible to secure them from the root user.
Is systemd-homed already useable for such usecase? If gnome will do the same for desktops, that would be a big plus, thinking about firefox profiles and such. Hopefully also using pam or kerberos for decryption.
Why would you want desktop icons? I mean I get it, there were quite popular back in the day, but I don’t see how a big junky place of a desktop has any benefit
Meh. The design and all is very good, great even, but the performance is donkey. And no, telling people to turn off animations and compositor is not a valid solution, when other DEs keep the animations, especially GNOME.
I really like Gnome but requiring extensions to work properly is bad design imo.
For example my moms laptop runs Gnome and she doesn’t need much except 3 basic features: a dock, desktop & tray icons. Tray icons are necessary because Nextcloud relies on them to show the sync status, desktop icons are great to have temporary files easily accessible for a presentation.
In my opinion the most frustrating decision of Gnime is to not allow making the “dash” permanently visible, in other words, a dock. I’d argue it’s even an accessibility option because it’s easier to click on something visible than having to open the overview.
It’s frustrating since Gnome is an almost perfect desktop for anyone who wants a simple, working desktop.
I use Gnome without extensions, it’s great. IMO Microsoft didn’t invent the perfect UX paradigm back in the early 90s. People use a task bar and start menu because they’re used to it, not because it’s better IMO.
I’m glad Gnome had the balls to do away with tradition and go with something different. It’s led to a much better workflow IMO.
Gnome is great for people who like the opinionated workflow. Sadly that is not most people, at least I know of 5 people who tried Gnome and 4 came to the conclusion that the lack of a taskbar/launcher/dock makes it unsuitable for their desktop usage.
If Gnome had an optional dock, they might’ve actually used it and found out how great Gnome is. Maybe at some point they’d even disable the dock and return to the blessed workflow.
I wonder if there’s a way they could neatly implement them without cluttering the desktop. Like what if they were somewhere in the overview or something?
For the 1000th time, those extensions aren’t even close to what something really native would offer. They fail in some circumstances like drag and drop to certain plains and behave inconsistently.
GNOME Extensions actually run in the gnome-shell process itself and can do most things that a builtin solution could offer.
They fail in some circumstances […] and behave inconsistently
That proves why they shouldn’t be part of GNOME Shell themselves. Offloading some (debatable) functionality to extensions helps keeping the core components reliable and maintainable.
linux
Newest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.